The Second Amendment
Bored

Perry, GA

#192 Feb 28, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
"A party of one can make up a militia" ?
Please - You really don't believe that.
Apparently the Constitution contemplated a guy named "Bob", organizing and regulating himself, to stand alone, protecting and defending against the hoards of invaders from foreign nations.
Wait - I saw that movie.
But I didn't take it seriously.
Dictionary Definition-
Militia: noun
1. a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies.
2. a body of citizen soldiers as distinguished from professional soldiers.
3. all able-bodied males considered by law eligible for military service.
Boring.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#193 Feb 28, 2013
Groans wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
Some of us militias are protecting our county from the likes of you and Oh My.
Dreaming of a house to house sweep to root us out, or maybe a few local road blocks to find those lurking undesirables. Keep posting, it's always good to hear from self-guided citizens who are clearly above the law.
Groans

Perry, GA

#194 Feb 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Dreaming of a house to house sweep to root us out, or maybe a few local road blocks to find those lurking undesirables. Keep posting, it's always good to hear from self-guided citizens who are clearly above the law.

Mano a Mano, your militia against my militia.
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#195 Feb 28, 2013
Thank God for these militias of one protecting our communities with their well trained response.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Orange-City-...
A man arrested for opening fire in a busy Walmart parking lot said he was trying to stop a shoplifter and is now defending his actions.

Orange City police arrested Jose Martinez, 35, after they said he unleashed at least five bullets in the parking lot of the Walmart on Veterans Memorial Parkway.

Martinez told Local 6, he was defending himself from a shoplifter who nearly ran him over and injured him.

"The guy put me in danger and other people," said Martinez as police hauled him off to jail Wednesday evening. "He tried to run me over."

But police said Martinez only was bumped by the shoplifter's getaway car because he was chasing after the car and even tried to open the door to the moving vehicle before he opened fire....
Harvey

Phenix City, AL

#196 Feb 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
Thank God for these militias of one protecting our communities with their well trained response.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Orange-City-...
A man arrested for opening fire in a busy Walmart parking lot said he was trying to stop a shoplifter and is now defending his actions.
Orange City police arrested Jose Martinez, 35, after they said he unleashed at least five bullets in the parking lot of the Walmart on Veterans Memorial Parkway.
Martinez told Local 6, he was defending himself from a shoplifter who nearly ran him over and injured him.
"The guy put me in danger and other people," said Martinez as police hauled him off to jail Wednesday evening. "He tried to run me over."
But police said Martinez only was bumped by the shoplifter's getaway car because he was chasing after the car and even tried to open the door to the moving vehicle before he opened fire....
What the heck did that article have to do about a militia?? Just another way that lefty jackasses put a spin on a story to try and suit their needs. Go watch more of your state run liberal media and wash it it down with obammy koolaid!
Oh my

Blairsville, GA

#197 Feb 28, 2013
Harvey wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
What the heck did that article have to do about a militia?? Just another way that lefty jackasses put a spin on a story to try and suit their needs. Go watch more of your state run liberal media and wash it it down with obammy koolaid!
Hey Harvey,
if you're going to participate,
do try and keep up.

Groans wrote:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
"There is no minimum size to militia, and a solitary act of defense, including self-defense, can be thought of as one person calling up himself to defend the community, represented by himself or others, and to enforce the law."

A party of one can make up a militia, including you. So go play with your windmills.
Harvey

Phenix City, AL

#198 Feb 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Harvey,
if you're going to participate,
do try and keep up.
Groans wrote:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
"There is no minimum size to militia, and a solitary act of defense, including self-defense, can be thought of as one person calling up himself to defend the community, represented by himself or others, and to enforce the law."
A party of one can make up a militia, including you. So go play with your windmills.
So, do you own a gun? If so I guess that makes you a left wing nutjob milita. Huh?

“Whine-It's all Bush's Fault”

Since: Feb 13

Blairsville

#199 Feb 28, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Another version of what is meant by "a militia":
In colonial America, regulars were a rare sight. If military activity was needed, the militia, consisting of all adult males, was called out. Mustering days for the militia were often relaxed affairs, with picnics, parades, speeches by local politicians, drinking, and maybe a little drill for the militia. Officers were often elected at the company level, with higher officers appointed by the governor of the colony.
So:
- the "well regulated" "militia" existed because there was no standing army;
- today we have the largest standing army on the planet and spend more on the War Department than the rest of the world combined to protect the 50 states; and
- Every state has a "well regulated" "National Guard" that responds to emergencies to protect that particular state;
Is the National Guard the "well regulated" militia" described in the Constitution ?
If not, who "regulates" the "militia" made up of me and my buddies and our AKs, AR-15s, and S&W 15s ?
and who are we protecting the "State" from ?
Just wondering.
Pay attention, simply go back and read, follow the links, and make some attempt to UNDERSTAND the fundamentals of the debate.
Yep, you answer lies within that covered territory.

“Whine-It's all Bush's Fault”

Since: Feb 13

Blairsville

#200 Feb 28, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously you have a comprehension problem, perhaps you're just toooo busy chasing the windmills of those slipping freedoms. To review, the question dealt with ad-hoc militias that don't need no government sanction, the kind some dream of when defining enemies who are killing our liberties.
No. Your question, not THE question dealt with “ad-hoc” militias and inferences to the possibility that fringe right wing radicals (while failing to recognize the same applies to left wingers as well) have agendas outside the perimeters of the legal arguments reasonable people are attempting to debate.

The qualifying adjectives you choose to impose, change entirely the fundamental dynamics of the rudimentary debate, and so will continue, as you attempt to set new perimeters designed to achieve your goals.

I think readers lose interest to boredom when hard headedness bleeds to Inifinitum , a tactic you employ ad-nauseam.

So, this sparring match need end.

After all, I’ve been able to have you acknowledge one of your sources as a fraud. That, in itself is some accomplishment.
Name Changer

Blairsville, GA

#201 Feb 28, 2013
Did you go to the meeting tonight, Mike?
Informed Opinion

Sunapee, NH

#202 Mar 1, 2013
Yep- wrote:
<quoted text>Pay attention, simply go back and read, follow the links, and make some attempt to UNDERSTAND the fundamentals of the debate.
Yep, you answer lies within that covered territory.
Don't you just hate to discuss things with folks who have actually read the Constitution ?

It sucks to have silly propositions identified as such, but hey, Right Wingers make it so easy.

In Colonial times the "militia" was a quasi-military organization, controlled by the state, existing to protect the state from external threats, made necessary to avoid the cost and risks to freedom created by the maintenance of a standing army.

Hence the language: referring to A "well regulated" militia being necessary to the "security" of a free "state" ....

The "militia" exists to protect the security of the "state", from other states.

No mention is made about the security of a "person" or a "resident" or a "citizen".

So unless you have the IQ of a walnut, the intent of the Second Amendment is obvious.

Meanwhile, I keep my weapons to protect me and my family, not from the government -
you see I am not traitorously contemplating insurrection-
instead I keep my weapons to protect my family from the Right Wing Christian Taliban, which desires to force their religion onto my family.

Thank God, Allah, or Betty,(whatever), here comes the French Toast.
Bored

Perry, GA

#203 Mar 1, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you just hate to discuss things with folks who have actually read the Constitution ?
It sucks to have silly propositions identified as such, but hey, Right Wingers make it so easy.
In Colonial times the "militia" was a quasi-military organization, controlled by the state, existing to protect the state from external threats, made necessary to avoid the cost and risks to freedom created by the maintenance of a standing army.
Hence the language: referring to A "well regulated" militia being necessary to the "security" of a free "state" ....
The "militia" exists to protect the security of the "state", from other states.
No mention is made about the security of a "person" or a "resident" or a "citizen".
So unless you have the IQ of a walnut, the intent of the Second Amendment is obvious.
Meanwhile, I keep my weapons to protect me and my family, not from the government -
you see I am not traitorously contemplating insurrection-
instead I keep my weapons to protect my family from the Right Wing Christian Taliban, which desires to force their religion onto my family.
Thank God, Allah, or Betty,(whatever), here comes the French Toast.
Boring and yawns.

“Whine-It's all Bush's Fault”

Since: Feb 13

Blairsville

#204 Mar 1, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you just hate to discuss things with folks who have actually read the Constitution ?
It sucks to have silly propositions identified as such, but hey, Right Wingers make it so easy.
In Colonial times the "militia" was a quasi-military organization, controlled by the state, existing to protect the state from external threats, made necessary to avoid the cost and risks to freedom created by the maintenance of a standing army.
Hence the language: referring to A "well regulated" militia being necessary to the "security" of a free "state" ....
The "militia" exists to protect the security of the "state", from other states.
No mention is made about the security of a "person" or a "resident" or a "citizen".
So unless you have the IQ of a walnut, the intent of the Second Amendment is obvious.
Meanwhile, I keep my weapons to protect me and my family, not from the government -
you see I am not traitorously contemplating insurrection-
instead I keep my weapons to protect my family from the Right Wing Christian Taliban, which desires to force their religion onto my family.
Thank God, Allah, or Betty,(whatever), here comes the French Toast.
Yep, the language in the Constitution is quite clear.

It is YOUR interpretations that are grossly flawed.

The numerous qualifications you apply to differing individual words and terms are those of your own and not legal precedence.

By now most everyone recognizes your leftist, progressive, and yes socialist views.

Of course the entire argument is your Second Amendment rights. And even as you attempt to twist them, no one is “traitorously contemplating insurrection”.

We all wish to protect our families, our way of life, as well as our Nation from tyranny.

I might add, coming from you, continuous lunatic ravings and comparisons of Christians to terrorists no longer holds any shock value, however, as it appears to me, as you intend blasphemous. And as well lend to a mind frame many ,if not most of us, find extreme in lacking creditably, and prudent judgment, if only from a view of self-respect or preservation.

Clearly, neither Christianity, nor Christ is a threat to you or your family or forcing anything upon either.
Harvey

Sylacauga, AL

#205 Mar 1, 2013
Yep- wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep, the language in the Constitution is quite clear.
It is YOUR interpretations that are grossly flawed.
The numerous qualifications you apply to differing individual words and terms are those of your own and not legal precedence.
By now most everyone recognizes your leftist, progressive, and yes socialist views.
Of course the entire argument is your Second Amendment rights. And even as you attempt to twist them, no one is “traitorously contemplating insurrection”.
We all wish to protect our families, our way of life, as well as our Nation from tyranny.
I might add, coming from you, continuous lunatic ravings and comparisons of Christians to terrorists no longer holds any shock value, however, as it appears to me, as you intend blasphemous. And as well lend to a mind frame many ,if not most of us, find extreme in lacking creditably, and prudent judgment, if only from a view of self-respect or preservation.
Clearly, neither Christianity, nor Christ is a threat to you or your family or forcing anything upon either.
Good luck trying to educate a lefty about anything. Personally, I think you have a better chance at winning the lottery than making a Libtard see the light.

“Whine-It's all Bush's Fault”

Since: Feb 13

Blairsville

#206 Mar 1, 2013
Harvey wrote:
<quoted text>Good luck trying to educate a lefty about anything. Personally, I think you have a better chance at winning the lottery than making a Libtard see the light.
Thanks Harvey, I'll take that as a positive on my posting.

When you’re taking as many shots as I am, you are happy to accept any comments even remotely appearing to be supportive.

Then again from another way of looking at things;

I think most of these "shots" I’m taking from hostile fire are nothing more than one extremist far left, progressive, socialist who is probably a part of Obama's gun control (read people control) movement; while fight to take our Second Amendment rights, is in all reality using a fully automatic “assault weapon” to deluge me with a barrage of shots, from nothing more than one malevolent little pea shooter.
Yap

Dahlonega, GA

#207 Mar 1, 2013
Yep- wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks Harvey, I'll take that as a positive on my posting.
When you’re taking as many shots as I am, you are happy to accept any comments even remotely appearing to be supportive.
Then again from another way of looking at things;
I think most of these "shots" I’m taking from hostile fire are nothing more than one extremist far left, progressive, socialist who is probably a part of Obama's gun control (read people control) movement; while fight to take our Second Amendment rights, is in all reality using a fully automatic “assault weapon” to deluge me with a barrage of shots, from nothing more than one malevolent little pea shooter.
The arrogant King Fool of Topix speaks. All hail the King of Fools.

“Whine-It's all Bush's Fault”

Since: Feb 13

Blairsville

#208 Mar 1, 2013
Yap wrote:
<quoted text>
The arrogant King Fool of Topix speaks. All hail the King of Fools.
Yep, yet another round fired. Yap, sounds like a bite dog, you know the one that hollars the loudist.
Informed Opinion

Lehigh Acres, FL

#209 Mar 1, 2013
Yep- wrote:
<quoted text>Yep, yet another round fired. Yap, sounds like a bite dog, you know the one that hollars the loudist.
A "well regulated" militia being necessary to the "security" of a free "state" ....

Sorry you don't like the language incorporated in the Constitution.

We'll let the Framers know that you consider their language superfluous and irrelevant.

Yep, a "well regulated" militia consists of one person, "regulating" himself, and single-handedly protecting the "security" of the "state".

That's sensible - on Right Wing Wacko Planet.

But, don't worry, nobody actually expects Right Wingers to engage in rational discussion or debate. It's just entertaining to watch them try.

Kind of like those pictures of dogs playing cards - you know they can't - but it's fun to imagine how it would be if they could.

“Whine-It's all Bush's Fault”

Since: Feb 13

Blairsville

#210 Mar 1, 2013
Yep- wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep, yet another round fired. Yap, sounds like a bite dog, you know the one that hollars the loudist.
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
A "well regulated" militia being necessary to the "security" of a free "state" ....
Sorry you don't like the language incorporated in the Constitution.
We'll let the Framers know that you consider their language superfluous and irrelevant.
Yep, a "well regulated" militia consists of one person, "regulating" himself, and single-handedly protecting the "security" of the "state".
That's sensible - on Right Wing Wacko Planet.
But, don't worry, nobody actually expects Right Wingers to engage in rational discussion or debate. It's just entertaining to watch them try.
Kind of like those pictures of dogs playing cards - you know they can't - but it's fun to imagine how it would be if they could.
Did you get mixed up as to what you were posting about? Or as whom you were posting as?

Yep, makes it rather difficult to know to whom to respond, or what to respond about.

Make up your mind, who are you and what do you want to talk about.
Bored

Perry, GA

#211 Mar 1, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
A "well regulated" militia being necessary to the "security" of a free "state" ....
Sorry you don't like the language incorporated in the Constitution.
We'll let the Framers know that you consider their language superfluous and irrelevant.
Yep, a "well regulated" militia consists of one person, "regulating" himself, and single-handedly protecting the "security" of the "state".
That's sensible - on Right Wing Wacko Planet.
But, don't worry, nobody actually expects Right Wingers to engage in rational discussion or debate. It's just entertaining to watch them try.
Kind of like those pictures of dogs playing cards - you know they can't - but it's fun to imagine how it would be if they could.
Boring.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Blairsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
I want potato salad 2 hr Booty bandit 2
UCSO is a joke Sun What 10
Union general Hospital Oct 21 Get off drugs dop... 6
PSA for young, unmarried women Oct 20 I hate rednecks 18
Where's Timmy ? Oct 20 Pumpkin 16
Places for rent. Oct 19 Juan 15
NGN lied in article Oct 19 Pumpkin 26

Blairsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Blairsville Mortgages